7 ms·
They are saying that if 50% of your generating capacity drops to 1% of you need a lot of gas powered plants to make up that difference. If your renewables repre
by wang_li 2y ago
They are saying that if 50% of your generating capacity drops to 1% of you need a lot of gas powered plants to make up that difference. If your renewables represent 1% of the generating capacity you need very little gas to make up that difference.
- ta1243 2y agoSo I have a grid with Gas and Renewables connected. 100% Gas will use 100TWh of gas to generate power 50% renewable will use 50TWh of gas to generate power
- nothercastle 2y agoYou missed the fact that the mix shifted. Coal and nuclear are too expensive where solar is available so you go from: 35% coal 30% nuclear 35% gas You go to 60% solar 40% gas. Obviously the numbers are made up but that’s the point I’m trying to make.
- ta1243 2y agoOr you go to 70% solar and 30% gas? If your example you've reduced generation from fossil fuels from 70% to 40% so still a win. I assume you're still going on about nuclear. The problem with nuclear is that it doesn't make financial sense even if it can run at 100% of capacity for 100% of the time, it certainly can't cope with variable load - you can't scale nuclear to provide your peak amount, so you need to be able to top up with gas or battery, just like renewables need top up